My Business Plan

The new energy bill phases out the incandescent light bulb. Apparently, our government doesn't realize that the alternative technology is not a suitable "or equal" replacement yet, and Hollywood doesn't realize that those aren't CFL bulbs above the mirrors in the dressing room or in the ETC Source Fours lighting the stage.

Ok, whatever. If the government is taking away the light bulb, I may as well take advantage of it. I'm stocking up on illegal light bulbs, and then I'll wait. Plenty of people are going to want my product, because the light is still far superior to CFL and LED. I'll be able to own the black market. That's tax free income, too!

When I've sold enough of my contraband, I'll not stop there. The governement can't outlaw the components of an incandescent bulb. Argon, glass, and tungsten wire aren't used only in light bulbs. So, all I need to do is buy an abanodoned production line cheap from Ebay, put it in a warehouse, and fire it up. I'll be Thomas Edison and Paul Revere in one! And, I'll be rich.

I should thank the president for handing me my retirement plan.

Democrats: Party of the Rich

This helps explains why I'm a Republican I guess.

You have to love studies that blow up stereotypes.

Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts.

In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.

He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.

"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.

A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.

But in a broader measurement, the study also showed that of the 167 House districts where the median annual income was higher than the national median of $48,201, a slight majority, 84 districts, were represented by Democrats. Median means that half of all income earners make more than that level and half make less.

Mr. Franc's study also showed that contrary to the Democrats' tendency to define Republicans as the party of the rich, "the vast majority of unabashed conservative House members hail from profoundly middle-income districts."

This really shouldn't be startling news. Look at Hollywood -- full of Democrats. Look at Manhattan -- full of Democrats. A listing of the richest U.S. Senators found an overwhelming majority of the ten richest were Democrats (Rockefeller, Kohl, Kennedy, Kerry, etc.). Does Steve Kagen come off as a "man of the people" when he dumped $2.6 million into his campaign last year like it was nothing?

And to think, for years Democrats have been wondering why middle-income Americans weren't "voting their income." Seems like they were after all.